How are local governments planning for heat mitigation? A study of Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley jurisdictions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extreme heat is a growing concern for local governments, whose regulatory control of land development impacts the urban heat island effect. To better understand how local governments are responding, this study reviewed heat mitigation plans and policies from municipalities and regional districts in the historically temperate south coast of mainland British Columbia by asking how are Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley jurisdictions planning for extreme heat? 243 documents across 29 jurisdictions (27 municipalities and two regional districts) were reviewed using a plan evaluation framework for urban heat planning and keyword searches. Our results showed that heat-mitigating interventions were not uniformly or explicitly included within or across governments. Showing a lack of consideration of extreme heat as a hazard. Urban greening and site-scale interventions were the most common across jurisdictions. We argue that effective local governance for extreme heat requires regional coordination and alignment with higher levels of government and coordination across departments within local governments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it